Your KPIs are Questionable

Your KPIs are Questionable

I often see businesses through the lens of resource optimization. Recently, I’ve been struck by the parallel between two high-pressure environments: Contact Centers and Air Traffic Control. Both operate on the same fundamental principles of Erlang math and queuing theory.

And, if they aren’t being run with the same level of precision, they should be.

The Predictability of 80/30

In the contact center world, we live by the "80/30" rule: 80% of calls answered within 30 seconds. While this is technically a post-mortem metric, it is at least predictable. There is math that allows us to calculate exactly how many seats we need to fund to hit that target. It’s a resource calculation. We can precisely measure exactly how many people are needed on each shift in 30-minute intervals to build in the necessary redundancies. We can model the possible.

The Failure of the "Post-Mortem" Metric

The problem arises when leadership stops measuring the Input and starts obsessing over the Wreckage. This is why your KPIs are questionable: You are measuring for failure instead of setting metrics that set you up for success. Air Traffic Control tracks POET (Performance Objective Evaluation Tool) and "Operational Errors" per million. They track "Delay Minutes"—their version of a "Wait Time."

Here is the reality: You cannot calculate a miracle.

Measuring "Delay" or "Errors" doesn't drive behavior; it just records the damage after the crash. It’s a metric of the past. By the time that needle moves, the system has already collapsed. You can't manage a business by looking in the rearview mirror while accelerating toward a cliff. When "Delay" is your primary measure, you are simply incentivizing people to shave the 20-second safety gap down to 10 just to keep the queue moving.

Funding the Possible

The conversation should not be about how many errors occurred. It should be about what is actually possible with the resources you are willing to commit. As a Strategic Advisor, I look at staffing through a strategic lens, not just a cost-cutting spreadsheet.

• Align the Goal to the Budget: If you can only afford a certain number of people, you must change the goal. You cannot fund a skeleton crew and demand a gold-standard response. That isn't leadership; it’s a delusion.

• Standardized Levers: We must set safety metrics and standardized levers as part of a Business Continuity Plan (BCP). If staffing drops below a certain percentage, the response is not to work harder. The lever is to reduce volume or increase separation. You don't hope for a miracle; you trigger a pre-planned operational response.

• The Redundancy Requirement: In the tower, as in your front office, redundancy is not a "waste." It is the vital buffer required to handle reality.

The Lilac City Takeaway

If you aren’t willing to fund the headcount required by the math, you have forfeited the right to expect the 30-second answer. You cannot starve a system of resources and then act surprised when it starves you of results. When eliminate the safety margin between moving parts, you aren't managing a process, you're praying for a miracle. And in business, 'hope' is not a strategy.

At Lilac City Advisory, I help you stop gambling. I build models that treat your staff like the critical assets they are. I make schedules efficient and let the people breathe so your business can actually fly.

A Note to the WFM Community

I often hear how "impossible" it is for the FAA to find people who can handle the cognitive load of Air Traffic Control, yet I see highly skilled WFM Real-Time Analysts being outsourced overseas as overhead."

To the RTAs out there: You have the skills. Managing a queue, balancing capacity against spikes, and pulling levers in real-time is exactly what they are doing in that tower. The only difference is the "live-or-die" stakes. Your ability to see the patterns in the chaos is a high-level strategic asset. Don't let a spreadsheet (or an Ops manager) tell you otherwise.